SUPREME COURT OF THE CANAL ZONE. Jan. Term,

that the amount of the loan be paid with interest; that the principal of the loan, and interest thereon, is due and unpaid; it describes the mortgage with proper words of reference, and attaches a copy to the complaint; it describes the property by metes and bounds; it asserts that, according to the Civil Code of the Canal /.one, the complainants have the right to request the sale of the property at public auction, and to claim the immediate payment of the amount due. There is also attached to the complaint a certificate of the decree finding Macgdalena and Toms Herrera heirs of Don Toma"s Herrera; also the marriage certificate of Manuel Calder6n and Magdalena Herrera.
The Court finds that every necessary allegation of a bill for the foreclosure of a mortgage on property within the Canal Zone, by a Court of the Canal Zone, is properly pleaded. There is no rule of law that prohibits the bringing of actions in different jurisdictions where the defendant may be found, involving the same subject matter.
The principle governing such cases is, that if full relief can be had in the one suit, nL(, others shall be allowed, and a demurrer lies ; but if the prior action is for relief which could not be granted in the action demurred to, this principle does not apply. And a demurrer is not sustained where the other action is pending in a court of the United States, or of a sister State.
1 Boone Code Pleading, page 78.
There can of course be but one satisfaction, but it appears from the memorial in this case, that no benefit whatsoever had been had by the complainants by reason of the institution and termination of the litigation in the Republic of Panama, and as the Panamanian court ceased to have jurisdiction over the subject matter, the complainant had the right to bring his suit in the Circuit Court of the Canal Zone, in the circuit where the property was situated, and where the Court had ample jurisdiction to do justice between the parties. The judgment of the Circuit Court of the Second Judicial Circuit, in sustaining the said plea and ordering the dismissal of the case at complainant's costs, is reversed and the case remanded for proceedings in conformity with this opinion. The costs of the appeal shall be taxed against the defendant.
CHIEF JUSTICE MUTIS concurred.
Reversed and remanded.

12